Method for multidimensional visual correlation of systems management data displaying orchestration action threshold

ABSTRACT

A method, apparatus, and computer program product for monitoring the performance of a system. The mechanism of the present invention provides an interface in the form of a graphical user interface (GUI) to communicate multiple layers of system performance data to an operator. An operator monitors this display of information and uses it to determine how to adjust the system to optimize system performance. This mechanism of the present invention provides immediate feedback to an operator by displaying a trail of metric points, wherein the metric points indicate the status of system performance over a period of time. In this manner, the display mechanism of the present invention immediately conveys to an operator whether the system is operating within predefined margins, the results of performance adjustments made to the system, as well as predictions or trends for the system.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present invention is related to the following application entitled “Method for Multidimensional Visual Correlation of Systems Management Data”, Ser. No. 10/753,250, filed on Jan. 8, 2004. The above related application is assigned to the same assignee, and incorporated herein by reference.

This application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 10/753,545, filed Jan. 8, 2004, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,401,142.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Technical Field

The present invention relates to computer and data processing systems, and, more particularly, to the field of network computing. Even more particularly, the present invention relates to monitoring system performance and communicating detailed system performance data via an enhanced graphical user interface.

2. Description of Related Art

Computers have increasingly become a necessity of modern life, both for individuals as well as businesses. With the emergence of the Internet and with ever increasing competition in the marketplace, stand alone computers no longer provide the necessary services and capabilities users require. Many, if not most, companies need to share information between multiple groups, often located in different cities or even different countries. Networked computers provide for the transfer of information between computers, possibly dissimilar, joined together by means of gateways that handle data transfer and the conversion of messages from the sending computer to the protocols used by the receiving computer (with packets if necessary).

Consequently, networks have become cultural fixtures as sources of information have continued to enlarge and grow. However, as systems have continued to expand, their complexity has increased, making management of the networks difficult. For example, many companies employ networks that contain not several computers and devices, but hundreds of thousands of devices. Systems may comprise interrelated components, such as hardware, software, networks, data, connections, databases, processes, and procedures. Processes may use multiple technologies of disparate types. To manage these systems, an operator may monitor system performance in order to know where to update, configure, and adjust the system to increase customer satisfaction.

Current methods of monitoring and displaying system performance information consist of providing a static-type interface to an operator. The information is typically presented to the operator in a “stop light” or “speedometer” type of representation. However, these static interfaces merely provide a quick overview of the current status of the system. To obtain more detailed information regarding a potential problem, the operator must access reports or printouts containing the additional information.

Therefore, it would be advantageous to have a method, apparatus, and computer program product for providing an enhanced display for communicating system performance data, whereby multiple layers of system performance information may be communicated to an operator in a quick and efficient manner.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides a method, apparatus, and computer program product for monitoring the performance of a system. The mechanism of the present invention provides an interface in the form of a graphical user interface (GUI) to communicate multiple layers of system performance data to an operator. An operator monitors this display of information and uses it to determine how to adjust the system to optimize system performance. This mechanism of the present invention provides immediate feedback to an operator by displaying a trail of metric points, wherein the metric points indicate the status of system performance over a period of time. In this manner, the display mechanism of the present invention immediately conveys to an operator whether the system is operating within predefined margins, the results of performance adjustments made to the system, as well as predictions or trends for the system. As a result, multiple layers of system performance information may be communicated to an operator in a quick and efficient manner.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The novel features believed characteristic of the invention are set forth in the appended claims. The invention itself, however, as well as a preferred mode of use, further objectives and advantages thereof, will best be understood by reference to the following detailed description of an illustrative embodiment when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:

FIG. 1 is a representation of a network of data processing systems in which the present invention may be implemented;

FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a data processing system that may be implemented as a server in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 3 is a block diagram of a data processing system in which the present invention may be implemented;

FIG. 4 is an illustration of a known systems management graphical user interface;

FIG. 5 is an exemplary diagram illustrating a graphical user interface for monitoring system performance according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 6 is a flowchart of a process for presenting multiple layers of system performance data in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 7 is an exemplary diagram illustrating a graphical user interface for displaying acceptable parameters of system operation based on service level agreements and/or orchestration action thresholds in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention; and

FIG. 8 is a flowchart of a process for displaying acceptable parameters of system operation based on service level agreements and/or orchestration action thresholds in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

With reference now to the figures, FIG. 1 depicts a pictorial representation of a network of data processing systems in which the present invention may be implemented. Network data processing system 100 is a network of computers in which the present invention may be implemented. Network data processing system 100 contains a network 102, which is the medium used to provide communications links between various devices and computers connected together within network data processing system 100. Network 102 may include connections, such as wire, wireless communication links, or fiber optic cables.

In the depicted example, server 104 is connected to network 102 along with storage unit 106. In addition, clients 108, 110, and 112 are connected to network 102. These clients 108, 110, and 112 may be, for example, personal computers, transactional systems, or network computers. In the depicted example, server 104 provides data, such as boot files, operating system images, and applications to clients 108-112. Clients 108, 110, and 112 are clients to server 104, or application to application such as in transactional systems. Network data processing system 100 may include additional servers, clients, and other devices not shown. In the depicted example, network data processing system 100 is the Internet with network 102 representing a worldwide collection of networks and gateways that for example, use the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) suite of protocols to communicate with one another. At the heart of the Internet is a backbone of high-speed data communication lines between major nodes or host computers, consisting of thousands of commercial, government, educational and other computer systems that route data and messages. Of course, network data processing system 100 also may be implemented as a number of different types of networks, such as for example, an intranet, a local area network (LAN), or a wide area network (WAN). FIG. 1 is intended as an example, and not as an architectural limitation for the present invention.

A system may span a single or multiple networks, such as for example, network data processing system 100. Also, a system may contain multiple client-server, client-to-client, and stand-alone data processing systems.

Referring to FIG. 2, a block diagram of a data processing system that may be implemented as a server, such as server 104 in FIG. 1, is depicted in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention. Data processing system 200 preferably includes a graphical user interface (GUI) that may be implemented by means of systems software residing in computer readable media in operation within data processing system 200. Data processing system 200 may be a symmetric multiprocessor (SMP) system including a plurality of processors 202 and 204 connected to system bus 206. Alternatively, a single processor system may be employed. Also connected to system bus 206 is memory controller/cache 208, which provides an interface to local memory 209. I/O bus bridge 210 is connected to system bus 206 and provides an interface to I/O bus 212. Memory controller/cache 208 and I/O bus bridge 210 may be integrated as depicted.

Peripheral component interconnect (PCI) bus bridge 214 connected to I/O bus 212 provides an interface to PCI local bus 216. A number of modems may be connected to PCI local bus 216. Typical PCI bus implementations will support four PCI expansion slots or add-in connectors. Communications links to clients 108-112 in FIG. 1 may be provided through modem 218 and network adapter 220 connected to PCI local bus 216 through add-in boards.

Additional PCI bus bridges 222 and 224 provide interfaces for additional PCI local buses 226 and 228, from which additional modems or network adapters may be supported. In this manner, data processing system 200 allows connections to multiple network computers. A memory-mapped graphics adapter 230 and hard disk 232 may also be connected to I/O bus 212 as depicted, either directly or indirectly.

Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the hardware depicted in FIG. 2 may vary. For example, other peripheral devices, such as optical disk drives and the like, also may be used in addition to or in place of the hardware depicted. The depicted example is not meant to imply architectural limitations with respect to the present invention.

The data processing system depicted in FIG. 2 may be, for example, an IBM eServer pSeries system, a product of International Business Machines Corporation in Armonk, N.Y., running the Advanced Interactive Executive (AIX) operating system or LINUX operating system.

With reference now to FIG. 3, a block diagram illustrating a data processing system is depicted in which the present invention may be implemented. Data processing system 300 is an example of a client computer. Data processing system 300 preferably includes a graphical user interface (GUI) that may be implemented by means of systems software residing in computer readable media in operation within data processing system 300. Data processing system 300 employs a peripheral component interconnect (PCI) local bus architecture. Although the depicted example employs a PCI bus, other bus architectures such as Accelerated Graphics Port (AGP) and Industry Standard Architecture (ISA) may be used. Processor 302 and main memory 304 are connected to PCI local bus 306 through PCI bridge 308. PCI bridge 308 also may include an integrated memory controller and cache memory for processor 302. Additional connections to PCI local bus 306 may be made through direct component interconnection or through add-in boards. In the depicted example, local area network (LAN) adapter 310, SCSI host bus adapter 312, and expansion bus interface 314 are connected to PCI local bus 306 by direct component connection. In contrast, audio adapter 316, graphics adapter 318, and audio/video adapter 319 are connected to PCI local bus 306 by add-in boards inserted into expansion slots. Expansion bus interface 314 provides a connection for a keyboard and mouse adapter 320, modem 322, and additional memory 324. Small computer system interface (SCSI) host bus adapter 312 provides a connection for hard disk drive 326, tape drive 328, and CD-ROM drive 330. Typical PCI local bus implementations will support three or four PCI expansion slots or add-in connectors.

An operating system runs on processor 302 and is used to coordinate and provide control of various components within data processing system 300 in FIG. 3. The operating system may be a commercially available operating system, such as “WINDOWS XP”, which is a trademark of Microsoft Corporation. An object oriented programming system such as JAVA may run in conjunction with the operating system and provide calls to the operating system from JAVA programs or applications executing on data processing system 300. “JAVA” is a trademark of Sun Microsystems, Inc. Instructions for the operating system, the object-oriented operating system, and applications or programs are located on storage devices, such as hard disk drive 326, and may be loaded into main memory 304 for execution by processor 302.

Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the hardware in FIG. 3 may vary depending on the implementation. Other internal hardware or peripheral devices, such as flash read-only memory (ROM), equivalent nonvolatile memory, or optical disk drives and the like, may be used in addition to or in place of the hardware depicted in FIG. 3. Also, the processes of the present invention may be applied to a multiprocessor data processing system.

As another example, data processing system 300 may be a stand-alone system configured to be bootable without relying on some type of network communication interfaces. In a further example, data processing system 300 may be a personal digital assistant (PDA) device, which is configured with ROM and/or flash ROM in order to provide non-volatile memory for storing operating system files and/or user-generated data.

The depicted example in FIG. 3 and above-described examples are not meant to imply architectural limitations. For example, data processing system 300 also may be a notebook computer or hand held computer in addition to taking the form of a PDA.

The present invention provides a method, apparatus, and instructions for monitoring system performance by providing an enhanced display of system performance data. This enhanced display provides a quick and efficient presentation of multiple layers of system performance information to an operator.

In known system management systems, performance data is displayed to operators using static representations of the system performance. Although current systems management interfaces provide a quick overview of the current status of a system, to obtain more detailed information regarding a potential problem, the operator must access reports or printouts containing this additional information.

For example, a typical systems performance data display uses a “stoplight” display for communicating system information to an operator. The stoplight consists of green, yellow, and red lights, wherein green indicates “satisfactory” performance, yellow indicates “improvement required”, and red indicates “unacceptable” performance. These colored lights are used to indicate the current status of the system, and whether or not the system is working within set margins. For instance, if the stoplight for a particular performance indicator in the display is green, no action is required from the operator, since the green light indicates that system performance is within satisfactory boundaries for the particular indicator.

If the stoplight for a performance indicator in the display is yellow, there may be need for concern since the system is deviating from predefined target goals. Each change in the display is typically associated with an event or problem, as well as associated with a severity level and action to perform to remedy the event. The action to remedy the event may be automatically triggered, or the action may be made manually by the operator in order to get the system back on track in order to meet the target goals. Examples of possible actions include no action, warning messages, emails, or pages informing the operator of the event, and an automatic system response, such as initiating a program to remedy the event autonomically.

If the stoplight for a performance indicator is red, there may be a need for immediate action since the system has deviated from predefined target goals. Immediate adjustment is required, since the service provider may have to pay a penalty to the customer due to unacceptable performance.

However, the known stoplight representation as shown below in FIG. 4 merely conveys whether or not the system is operating within defined margins. If the operator wants to obtain more detailed information regarding a problem identified from the stoplight criterion, the operator must access a report or printout to obtain this additional information.

With reference now to FIG. 4, a block diagram of a known systems management graphical user interface is shown. In particular, FIG. 4 illustrates a graphical user interface of Produce Plus, a business performance management software product available from GOLEM Integrated Microelectronics Solutions GmbH, located in Vienna, Austria. Graphical user interface 400 may be implemented in data processing system 200 in FIG. 2 and/or data processing system 300 shown in FIG. 3. In this example interface, various systems performance information is displayed in graphical user interface 400.

Performance information may include performance indicators for assessment areas such as work production 402, quality 404, overall effective efficiency 406, performance/efficiency 408, costs 410, labor performance 412, and the like. Indicators are typically selected to focus on the most important assessment areas that an operator needs to optimize the system. The operator may view this performance information in the form of a “stoplight” representation, such as stoplight displays 414, to determine if there is a problem with system performance. If the operator has identified a problem, the operator may view corresponding reports and printouts containing more detailed information to determine adjustments to be made to system operation to correct the identified problem. The operator may determine how to adjust system operation by comparing detailed current systems information with previously defined target information.

As mentioned previously, the present invention provides a graphical user interface through which multiple layers of system performance information may be communicated to an operator. A display mechanism is provided that conveys a detailed representation of current system performance. This mechanism provides immediate feedback to an operator by displaying a trail of metric points, wherein the metric points indicate the status of system performance over a period of time. In this manner, the display mechanism of the present invention immediately conveys to an operator whether the system is operating within predefined margins, the results of performance adjustments made to the system, as well as predictions or trends for the system. As a result, multiple layers of system performance information may be communicated to an operator in a quick and efficient manner.

Turning next to FIG. 5, an exemplary diagram illustrating a graphical user interface for monitoring system performance is depicted in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention. Graphical user interface 500 may be implemented in data processing system 200 in FIG. 2 and/or data processing system 300 shown in FIG. 3.

As shown in FIG. 5, a graphical user interface provides multiple layers of system performance data quickly and efficiently in the form of a target-type management vector display. Management vector display 500 is shown as a target representation, having a vertical and horizontal axis. Vertical 502 and horizontal axis 504 depict attributes set by the operator, such as, for example, database response time, server connect time, proxy connect time, number of requests/response headers delivered, and number of transactions per second. Industry baseline metrics may be used in setting the attributes. The ideal or target operational state of a monitored area of the system is the point where vertical 502 and horizontal 504 axis meet on management vector display 500.

Management vector display 500 also comprises three regions which indicate the status of system operation at a particular time. Each region may be depicted using a distinct color, such as green, yellow, and red. Region 506 may indicate “satisfactory” system performance, while region 508 may indicate “improvement required” and region 510 may indicate “unacceptable” system performance.

Region 506, or green region, contains the target operational state. The performance status of a particular area of the system at a particular time is indicated by a single dot or metric point on management vector display 500. When the metric point, such as metric points 512, is located within green region 506, the system is deemed to be working within acceptable margins of operation. No action is required by the operator in this situation.

If the metric point, such as metric points 514, is located within region 508, or yellow region, the system is determined to be outside of acceptable operation. Adjustments to the system operation may be recommended in order to steer system performance back into satisfactory margins of operation, and into green region 506. If the metric point, such as metric point 516, is located within red region 510, the system is determined to be outside of acceptable operation. Immediate adjustments to the system operation is required in this situation, since having system operation fall within red region 510 may result in a penalty for this “unacceptable” system performance.

Metric points 512, 514, 516 are used to indicate the current status of system performance at a particular time. As is shown in FIG. 5, metric points 512, 514, 516 depict a trail of status information determined at fixed periods of time. This trail of status information may be used to observe system performance trends. Management vector display 500 displays these trends in such a concise manner that many metrics may be simultaneously shown on management vector display 500, each metric having its own status trail, or history.

For example, each metric point in management display 500 may represent system performance status periodically determined every hour. In the first hour, system performance, as indicated by metric point 516, falls within red region 510. The operator may then make adjustments to the system operation in an attempt to move the state of the system from red region 510 towards the target operational state. Subsequent metric points determined at regular intervals, such as metric points 514 within yellow region 508, indicate that system performance has improved since metric point 516 was plotted. Metric points 514 show that although the status of system performance has improved, since metric points 514 still fall within yellow region 508, additional adjustments are still needed to move the state of the system into acceptable margins. Metric points 512, which fall within green region 506, illustrate the “acceptable” system performance over several fixed intervals of time.

Management vector display 500 also provides information regarding the results of performance adjustments made to the system. For example, metric points 512, 514, 516 also illustrate the state of the system over a period of time. The operator may use the metric trail to quickly view changes made to the system operation, as well as determine the effect these changes have on system performance.

As shown in FIG. 5, the closer a metric point is to the previous metric point, the slower the system changes over the fixed period of time. Conversely, the further apart a metric point is from the previous metric point, the faster the metric points change in value. For example, metric points 512 in green region 506 are closely spaced together. Although metric points 512 are indicated as having acceptable performance, the operator may make adjustments to the system operation in order to move the metric points closer towards the target operational state in the center of green region 506. The small effects of these adjustments made over a fixed period of time are conveyed via metric points 512, which show a slow rate of change since metric points 512 are plotted close together. In contrast, the distance between metric points 516 and 514 illustrates a large change in system performance over the same fixed period of time.

In some situations, as an operator adjusts system operation parameters to improve performance and move towards the target operational state, these adjustments may have some unintended consequence, such as drifting away from the target operational state. The mechanism of the present invention provides the operator with multiple layers of system performance data, including the current state of system performance, the results of previous performance adjustments, and a prediction/trend of future system performance in a quick and efficient manner.

Furthermore, vertical axis 502 and horizontal axis 504 are not necessarily to scale. Management vector display 500 may take any shape, including the round target form as shown in FIG. 5. In addition, the regions within management vector display 500, such as green region 506, yellow region 508, and red region 510, may be any size or shape. For example, it may be advantageous to have more space devoted to those regions having parameters where actions should be taken by the operator.

Although management vector display 500 is shown in FIG. 5 as a single system management display, management vector display 500 may be presented on a panel display together with additional management vector displays, each representing system performance and trends for a different set of variables. In this manner, the graphical user interface presented to an operator may comprise multiple target management vector displays on the same panel, each monitoring a different area of system performance.

Turning now to FIG. 6, a flowchart of a process for presenting multiple layers of system performance data is shown in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention. The process illustrated in FIG. 6 may be implemented in a data processing system, such as data processing system 200 in FIG. 2 and/or data processing system 300 shown in Figure.

The process begins by querying the current configuration for monitoring the system (step 602). The system configuration may be obtained from a BIOS call, a configuration file, or from a console or database. Configuration data may provide information such as which items to monitor, data polling intervals, location to send data, the threshold for an action, and which action to take. Next, system data is monitored using the instructions obtained from the BIOS call, configuration file, console, or database (step 604). System data may then be polled at set intervals according to the system configuration (step 606) or alternatively system data may be sent as events. A determination is then made as to whether the retrieved data is reportable (step 608). Whether data is reportable may depend on a number of criteria, such as, for example, if the data is a duplicate or if the user configuration indicates that the user is uninterested in the data, the data is not reportable and should be discarded. If the data is reportable, a determination is made as to which report to use to convey the data, and which information to include in the report (step 610). Turning back to step 608, if the data is not reportable, the process proceeds directly to step 612, wherein the data is formatted and sent for display on the graphical user interface. An alert may be raised if the data I nearing or crossing one of the displayed thresholds. Each of the previously represented data points are then de-emphasized using either color or intensity, the oldest point being de-emphasized the greatest. The number of previous representations maintained and “faded” depends upon the configuration of the display and the frequency of the updated data point. For more frequently updated data points, fewer points should be displayed to prevent clutter and enhance the understandability of the trending direction of the data points. A determination is then made as to whether additional data is received (step 614). If additional data is received, the process loops back to step 606. If no additional data is received, the process terminates.

The mechanism of the present invention may also be enhanced to include additional system management parameters to the operator. These parameters include boundaries derived from a service level agreement (SLA) and an orchestration action threshold. A service level agreement is an informal contract between a service provider and a customer that defines the terms of the service provider's responsibility to the customer. The service level agreement also includes the type and extent of remuneration if those responsibilities are not met. Orchestration defines a set of rules for a process flow, wherein processes are executed according to these defined rules in order to achieve a common goal between participants in the process. These rules may be used by the system to “orchestrate the response” to changes in the system.

Turning now to FIG. 7, an exemplary diagram illustrating a graphical user interface for displaying acceptable parameters of system operation based on service level agreements and/or orchestration action thresholds is depicted in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention. Graphical user interface 700 may be implemented in data processing system 200 in FIG. 2 and/or data processing system 300 shown in FIG. 3.

As shown in FIG. 7, a graphical user interface provides additional layers of system management data, including service level agreements and/or orchestration action thresholds. Service level agreements and/or orchestration action thresholds are defined in management vector display 700. As also described in FIG. 5, management vector display 700 comprises three regions that indicate the status of system operation at a particular time. Each region may be depicted using a distinct color, such as green, yellow, and red. Region 706 may indicate “satisfactory” system performance, while region 708 may indicate “improvement required” and region 710 may indicate “unacceptable” system performance.

SLA boundary 718, presented within management vector display 700, represents the metric boundary of a service level agreement at the current time. Although SLA boundary 718 is shown in a particular location on management vector display 700, SLA boundary 718 may change according to according to predefined time periods. For example, an operator may monitor the load on a CPU and response time using a service level agreement as represented by SLA boundary 718. As CPU load and response time may vary according to customer usage, the boundaries of a service level agreement may be altered according to predefined time periods. For instance, the boundaries of a service level agreement during an anticipated period of heavy customer usage, such as during a typical work day, may be different than the boundaries set for an anticipated period of light customer usage, such as around 12 o'clock midnight.

As mentioned previously, the performance status of a particular area of the system at a particular time is indicated by a single dot or metric point, such as metric point 716. SLA boundary 718, representing the metric boundary of the service level agreement at the current time, allows the operator to monitor and measure service level performance. As a metric point, such as metric point 716, is plotted on management vector display 700, the operator may determine whether system performance is in adherence with the service level agreement. If the metric point is plotted outside of SLA boundary 718, the system is not performing within defined parameters of operation. As a result, the operator must make adjustments to system operation to get the system back on track in order to adhere to the parameters of operation defined in the service level agreement. A penalty for not meeting the parameters of the agreement may also have to be paid due to the unacceptable performance.

If the metric point is plotted within SLA boundary 718, the system is performing within defined parameters of operation at the current time, and no penalty will result. For example, metric point 716 is plotted within red region 710. Typically, if system performance falls within red region 710, the operator will determine that current system performance is unacceptable and a penalty will result. However, using the additional layer of system information in SLA boundary 718, the operator may determine that, although metric point 716 falls within red region 710, system performance is still within acceptable limits, since metric point 716 is plotted within the current service level agreement boundary 700. Thus, even though system performance appears to be unacceptable from the plotting of metric point 716 in red region 710, the operator may quickly and efficiently determine that system performance is within acceptable limits according to the parameters in the service level agreement.

Orchestration action boundary 720, presented within management vector display 700, represents the metric boundary of an orchestration action threshold boundary at the current time. Although orchestration action boundary 720 is shown in a particular location on management vector display 700, orchestration action boundary 720 may change according to the demand on system resources. Orchestration allows users to manipulate their IT environment in real time, according to defined policies, to achieve desired goals. Orchestration “senses” an increase in the demand for resources and automatically takes action to reallocate those resources accordingly, and provisions them throughout the entire system. Thus, the system “orchestrates” the activities necessary to automatically meet required service levels.

Orchestration boundary 720 defines whether an automatic workflow correction will be invoked to adjust system performance, or whether a manual correction is required. For example, when metric point 716 is plotted on management vector display 700, the operator may determine that immediate adjustment is required since metric point falls within “unacceptable” red region 710. However, since metric point 716 also falls outside of orchestration boundary 720, the adjustment to the system will be made automatically, without operator intervention. A workflow correction is automatically invoked to reallocate system resources accordingly.

In contrast, when metric point 714 is plotted on management vector display 700, the operator may determine that an adjustment should be made since metric point falls within “improvement required” yellow region 708. However, since metric point 714 also falls within orchestration boundary 720, the operator must manually make the necessary adjustments to the system to improve system performance. Thus, as orchestration allows the system to autonomically correct itself, orchestration boundary 720 provides an operator with an additional layer of quick and efficient feedback regarding system performance.

Turning now to FIG. 8, a flowchart of a process for displaying acceptable parameters of system operation based on service level agreements and/or orchestration action thresholds is shown in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention. The process illustrated in FIG. 8 may be implemented in a data processing system, such as data processing system 200 in FIG. 2 and/or data processing system 300 shown in Figure.

The process begins by using a real time monitoring agent to monitor the polled data (step 802). System performance data may be obtained by polling system data, such as polled data obtained in step 606 in FIG. 6, although other methods of obtaining system performance data may be used. The poll monitor may be a push or pull monitor (i.e., polling or messaging). The polled data may include information such as the response time data from the server. Referring to the terms and rules in the SLA data, the polled data may be averaged if the number of transactions is high and the transactions are legal under the SLA terms, or the polled data may be used as a best case/worst case scenario. Next, the SLA boundaries for the type of display graphic (e.g., server response time) are calculated (step 804). The SLA boundaries may be calculated using the contractual data (rules) in the SLA agreement. The contractual data in the SLA agreement may be stored as XML (extensible markup language), for example, and may be a standard XML, such as OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards) ebXML. The status markers indicating system performance are then updated based on the current status (step 806). For example, the status markers may be updated like a fading of a radar return, although other updating schemes are possible to indicate the current status of the system, such as using colors fading using a rainbow scale. In the radar return example, the current system performance marker may be highlighted, while the other previous markers are faded by at least one increment. A determination is then made as to whether real time monitor is still receiving polled data (step 808). If so, the process loops back to step 802 and the process continues. Turning back to step 808, if is it determined that real time monitor is no longer receiving polled data, then the process terminates.

Thus, the present invention provides an improved method, apparatus, and computer instructions for monitoring system performance and communicating detailed system performance data via an enhanced graphical user interface. The mechanism of the present invention may assist system operators in monitoring and managing the performance of the system, which ultimately may result in more satisfied customers. The mechanism of the present invention provides an interface in the form of a graphical user interface (GUI) to communicate multiple layers of system performance data to an operator. An operator monitors this display of information and uses it to determine how to adjust the system to optimize system performance.

The present invention offers advantages over the known systems management systems since current methods of monitoring and displaying system performance information consist of providing a static-type interface to an operator. Known system performance displays, such as the “stoplight” representation, are static, and merely provide a quick overview of the current status of a system. The present invention improves upon current systems management displays by providing an enhanced graphical user interface for communicating system performance data, whereby multiple layers of system performance information may be communicated to an operator in a quick and efficient manner.

It is important to note that while the present invention has been described in the context of a fully functioning data processing system, those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the processes of the present invention are capable of being distributed in the form of a computer readable medium of instructions and a variety of forms and that the present invention applies equally regardless of the particular type of signal bearing media actually used to carry out the distribution. Examples of computer readable media include recordable-type media, such as a floppy disk, a hard disk drive, a RAM, CD-ROMs, DVD-ROMs, and transmission-type media, such as digital and analog communications links, wired or wireless communications links using transmission forms, such as, for example, radio frequency and light wave transmissions. The computer readable media may take the form of coded formats that are decoded for actual use in a particular data processing system.

The description of the present invention has been presented for purposes of illustration and description, and is not intended to be exhaustive or limited to the invention in the form disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art. The embodiment was chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the invention, the practical application, and to enable others of ordinary skill in the art to understand the invention for various embodiments with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated. 

1. A method for monitoring system performance and communicating acceptable parameters of system operation via an enhanced graphical user interface, comprising: obtaining system performance data to determine the current status of the system; determining a display graphic; calculating boundaries of acceptable system operation for the display graphic; updating system performance status markers, which indicate system performance at particular points in time, based on the current status of the system; and concurrently displaying the updated system performance status markers and the acceptable boundaries of system operation within a target-type management vector display, wherein the display includes regions representing levels of system performance, wherein the acceptable boundaries of system operation are displayed as a multi-dimensional closed shape object.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the boundaries are calculated using the contractual data in a service level agreement.
 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the target-type management vector display includes an intersecting vertical axis and horizontal axis, and wherein a target operational state of the system performance is a point where the vertical axis and horizontal axis intersect with one another.
 4. The method of claim 2, wherein the boundaries represent the service level agreement at a current time.
 5. The method of claim 2, wherein the boundaries of the service level agreement being displayed are changed within the target-type management vector display according to predefined time periods.
 6. The method of claim 2, wherein the position of a system performance status marker in relation to the service level agreement boundaries indicate whether system performance adheres to the service level agreement, wherein the displayed service level agreement boundaries are in a form of a polygon, and wherein the system performance (i) adheres to the service level agreement if the position of the system performance status marker is inside the polygon and (ii) does not adhere to the service level agreement if the position of the system performance status marker is outside the polygon.
 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the system performance status markers are displayed as a trail of status markers where the distance between individual ones of the status markers indicates a rate of change of the system performance at the particular points in time.
 8. The method of claim 1, wherein updating the status markers includes highlighting a current system performance status marker and fading the remaining system performance status markers that are displayed on the target-type management vector display by at least one increment.
 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the boundaries of acceptable system operation are based on orchestration action thresholds.
 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the orchestration action threshold boundaries change according to system resource demand.
 11. The method of claim 9, wherein an automatic workflow correction is invoked to adjust system performance if the current system performance status marker is located outside of the orchestration action threshold boundaries.
 12. The method of claim 1, wherein obtaining system performance data includes polling system data.
 13. A system for monitoring system performance and communicating acceptable parameters of system operation via an enhanced graphical user interface, comprising: a graphical user interface display device; a target-type management vector display within the graphical user interface, wherein the display includes regions representing levels of acceptable and unacceptable system performance, boundaries indicating acceptable system operation parameters, and system performance status markers identifying the status of system performance at a particular point in time, wherein the boundaries indicating acceptable system operation parameters are displayed as a multi-dimensional closed shape object.
 14. A data processing system for monitoring system performance and communicating acceptable parameters of system operation via an enhanced graphical user interface, comprising: a data processor, a computer readable memory and a computer readable storage media; first program instructions to determine system performance data to determine the current status of the system; second program instructions to determine a display graphic; third program instructions to calculate boundaries of acceptable system operation for the display graphic; fourth program instructions to update system performance status markers, which indicate system performance at particular points in time, based on the current status of the system; and fifth program instructions to concurrently display the updated system performance status markers and the acceptable boundaries of system operation within a target-type management vector display, wherein the display includes regions representing levels of system performance, wherein the acceptable boundaries of system operation are displayed as a multi-dimensional closed shape object; and the first, second, third, fourth and fifth program instructions are stored on the computer readable storage media for execution by the data processor via the computer readable memory.
 15. The data processing system of claim 14, wherein the boundaries are calculated using the contractual data in a service level agreement.
 16. The data processing system of claim 15, wherein the target-type management vector display includes an intersecting vertical axis and horizontal axis, and wherein a target operational state of the system performance is a point where the vertical axis and horizontal axis intersect with one another.
 17. The data processing system of claim 15, wherein the boundaries represent the service level agreement at a current time.
 18. The data processing system of claim 15, wherein the boundaries of the service level agreement being displayed are changed within the target-type management vector display according to predefined time periods.
 19. The data processing system of claim 15, wherein the position of a system performance status marker in relation to the service level agreement boundaries indicate whether system performance adheres to the service level agreement, wherein the displayed service level agreement boundaries are in a form of a polygon, and wherein the system performance (i) adheres to the service level agreement if the position of the system performance status marker is inside the polygon and (ii) does not adhere to the service level agreement if the position of the system performance status marker is outside the polygon.
 20. The data processing system of claim 14, wherein the system performance status markers are displayed as a trail of status markers where the distance between individual ones of the status markers indicates a rate of change of the system performance at the particular points in time.
 21. The data processing system of claim 14, wherein updating the status markers includes highlighting a current system performance status marker and fading the remaining system performance status markers that are displayed on the target-type management vector display by at least one increment.
 22. The data processing system of claim 14, wherein the boundaries of acceptable system operation are based on orchestration action thresholds.
 23. The data processing system of claim 22, wherein the orchestration action threshold boundaries change according to system resource demand.
 24. The data processing system of claim 22, wherein an automatic workflow correction is invoked to adjust system performance if the current system performance status marker is located outside of the orchestration action threshold boundaries.
 25. The data processing system of claim 14, wherein obtaining system performance data includes polling system data.
 26. A computer program product in a computer readable, recordable-type medium for monitoring system performance and communicating acceptable parameters of system operation via an enhanced graphical user interface, comprising: first instructions for obtaining system performance data to determine the current status of the system; second instructions for determining a display graphic; third instructions for calculating boundaries of acceptable system operation for the display graphic; fourth instructions for updating system performance status markers, which indicate system performance at particular points in time, based on the current status of the system; and fifth instructions for concurrently displaying the updated system performance status markers and the acceptable boundaries of system operation within a target-type management vector display, wherein the display includes regions representing levels of system performance, wherein the acceptable boundaries of system operation are displayed as a multi-dimensional closed shape object.
 27. The computer program product of claim 26, wherein the boundaries are calculated using the contractual data in a service level agreement.
 28. The computer program product of claim 27, wherein the target-type management vector display includes an intersecting vertical axis and horizontal axis, and wherein a target operational state of the system performance is a point where the vertical axis and horizontal axis intersect with one another.
 29. The computer program product of claim 27, wherein the boundaries represent the service level agreement at a current time.
 30. The computer program product of claim 27, wherein the boundaries of the service level agreement being displayed are changed within the target-type management vector display according to predefined time periods.
 31. The computer program product of claim 27, wherein the position of a system performance status marker in relation to the service level agreement boundaries indicate whether system performance adheres to the service level agreement, wherein the displayed service level agreement boundaries are in a form of a polygon, and wherein the system performance (i) adheres to the service level agreement if the position of the system performance status marker is inside the polygon and (ii) does not adhere to the service level agreement if the position of the system performance status marker is outside the polygon.
 32. The computer program product of claim 26, wherein the system performance status markers are displayed as a trail of status markers where the distance between individual ones of the status markers indicates a rate of change of the system performance at the particular points in time.
 33. The computer program product of claim 26, wherein updating the status markers includes highlighting a current system performance status marker and fading the remaining system performance status markers that are displayed on the target-type management vector display by at least one increment.
 34. The computer program product of claim 26, wherein the boundaries of acceptable system operation are based on orchestration action thresholds.
 35. The computer program product of claim 34, wherein the orchestration action threshold boundaries change according to system resource demand.
 36. The computer program product of claim 34, wherein an automatic workflow correction is invoked to adjust system performance if the current system performance status marker is located outside of the orchestration action threshold boundaries.
 37. The computer program product of claim 26, wherein obtaining system performance data includes polling system data. 